News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


Duke Maas

Where is GCA in architecture's spectrum?
« Reply #75 on: August 17, 2001, 08:44:00 AM »
Tommy N.,
Thanks for making fun of my name I appreciate it and btw I don't know many women by the name of Duke but maybe you do - I don't know or care to.  Its things like that that may make some lurkers feel intimidated about posting or think that this is some sort of closed club. Anyway par for the course as the saying goes.

That being said I agree with almost everything you have said on here. You are exactly right when you don't take excuses for work that is average at best.  I didn't say this site SHOULDN'T be influencial just that its influence is limited.  In my world all courses would be built by following the maxims of Thomas, Hunter, Darwin etc...

I think that Jeff Brauer's comments (if a bit condescending) illustrate my point.  Most architects are trying to earn a living, get commissions, and stay in the business and if they are able to include a few classical design features in their work all the better but not if it will cost them jobs.  Thats fine.  There are a lot of courses that need to be built and there are many golfers waiting to play them.  But I perfer not to spend my money on them. Ernest & Julio Gallo sell a lot of wine but I don't want to drink it.  I am looking to play the exceptional courses and I want to celebrate the exceptional architects.

The only problem I have is when the architect says things like, "you don't understand what its like".  Thats the oldest argument stopper in the book.  Don't like my work? Well you don't understand what it takes.  I reject that argument.  I can't draw anything more than a stick figure but I despise Jeff Koons and his "art", I have no idea how to make a film but to me Jerry Bruckheimer's movies are crap, and I barely know what end of a shovel to hold but I know a bad or disappointing golf course when I see it.
 
Rather than influence architects to be great I think this site identifies those who were or are or at least aspire to be.  But keep up the pressure Tommy.


Tommy_Naccarato

Where is GCA in architecture's spectrum?
« Reply #76 on: August 16, 2001, 10:54:00 PM »
Duke,
Sorry for the misnomer, it wasn't ill intended at all.

Sometimes I make these posts either after a long day at work or late at night when I should be in bed (Like right now) getting a good nights sleep for the next day. How I got "Uno" Maas was more then likely not paying attention to detail, just like many archtiects, and somehow equating the name from the memory banks with the term "Uno Maas" from the Roberto Duran/Sugar Ray Leonard era.

Sorry for the confusion.

Time for bed, and thank you for the encouragment. I only hope that all can find the need to express their views and opinions and encourage all to particpate.


T_MacWood

Where is GCA in architecture's spectrum?
« Reply #77 on: August 26, 2001, 10:56:00 AM »
Do articles like those written about Yale and Merion have any effect on architects?

Jeff_Brauer

  • Karma: +0/-0
Where is GCA in architecture's spectrum?
« Reply #78 on: August 26, 2001, 11:48:00 AM »
Tom,

Well, for one they have largely kept me out of the remodelling business in favor of new course work!  Yes, I have an ego, and it always deflates when I walk inside a club only to find out just how LITTLE I seem to know about my chosen profession!

The real problem, professionally speaking, is as someone mentioned, you can find someone to say all the right things about your work, but it is just as easy to find someone to say all the wrong things.  And, the nature of journalism is that the wrong things usually make a better story.

Architecturally speaking, the articles float around in the back of the mind and do influence my work. Of course, so do the "Best New" competitiions, comments from common golfers, owners, family and friends. It all factors subconsciously in individual design decisions. And remember, there are literally thousands of individual decisions, usually with many conflicting goals and ideals, in each project.  If Tommy doesn't like Ted R.'s style, that's one thing, but in many cases you can like a course, and disagree with a specific decision.

You guys will probably laugh at this very true statement, but the biggest reason classic design is resurfacing in modern work is that the powers that be in ASGCA have directed our meetings to more and more of these classic venues. Not many of us have the chance to go out east to study classics (which are concentrated heavily there). When we return from there (or Scotland) you can see it in our work.  Of course, sometimes it is in sanitized form we think our clients will accept - (Tommy, Ted isn't the only architect with "too smooth" pot bunkers out there after our first trip to Scotland in 1980.)

Duke,

Me? Condescending?

Tommy,

You have never insulted me, but thanks for the apology in advance for the time when you certainly will!

BTW, as a Chicago boy, I am very familiar with FLW, and in fact had him in mind when thinking of lost artesians

Jeff

Jeff Brauer, ASGCA Director of Outreach

Tony Ristola

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Where is GCA in architecture's spectrum?
« Reply #79 on: March 27, 2012, 11:27:22 AM »
Was looking at older stuff and thought this decade old thread might be of interest.

Where is GCA's in architecture's spectrum 10.5 years after?